Barfoot & Thompson sold just over a third of the properties the agency marketed for sale by auction last week.
The agency had 126 residential properties scheduled for auction and sold 47 of them, giving an overall clearance rate of 37%.
The remaining 79 were mostly passed in for sale by negotiation, while a few had their auction dates postponed or were withdrawn from sale.
At the major auctions where at least 10 properties were on offer, the highest sales rate was at the Shortland Street auction on June 12, where 10 properties were offered, mostly in central-west suburbs such as Blockhouse Bay, Avondale, Glen Eden and Te Atatu, with sales achieved on 50%, while the lowest sales rate from the major auctions was at the Manukau auction where 28% were sold.
Details of all the properties offered and the prices achieved on most of the individual properties that sold, are available on our Residential Auction Results page.
| Date | Venue | Sold | Not Sold | Total | % Sold |
| 11-17 June | On site | 3 | 2 | 5 | 60% |
| 12 June | Manukau | 7 | 18 | 25 | 28% |
| 12 June | Shortland St, CBD. | 5 | 5 | 10 | 50% |
| 13 June Mortgagee/Court | Shortland St, CBD. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 33% |
| 13 June | Shortland St, CBD. | 10 | 19 | 29 | 34% |
| 13 June | Whangarei | 2 | 1 | 3 | 67% |
| 13 June | Pukekohe | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| 14 June | North Shore | 9 | 19 | 28 | 32% |
| 14 June | Shortland St, CBD. | 3 | 3 | 6 | 50% |
| 15 June | Shortland St, CBD. | 7 | 8 | 15 | 47% |
| Total | All vanues | 47 | 79 | 126 | 37% |
178 Comments
Even if we avoid another global shock, it's easy to visualize a 10% or more pullback in nationwide house prices in next few years. There are several well documented reasons supporting this. When adjusted for inflation, thats a considerable adjustment. If I were a first time buyer, I would certainly avoid this market.
Good on you Crispy.
I met a chap in England a few years back now, he'd been to see a Real Estate agent who had told him his family house was worth £1,000,000. He'd bought it years before for £37,000 and couldn't believe how lucky he was to have seen such astronomical capital growth.
He immediately planned his retirement and bought a house in Spain using £300,000 of borrowed money. He planned to sell his house in The UK and buy a smaller one for £700,000 and live in that half the year and Spain the other half. The family home for £700,000 would still be a comfortable space for half the year. Or so he thought.
Unfortunately his house was never worth £1,000,000. But in 2006 Northern Rock were happy to lend him £300,000 as it was worth more than that and they were covered even if he was only working part time In reality it had actually been worth at best £750,000 but he waited a while for his million finally selling for £600,000 when it finally sold in 2008 after 18 months on the market..
He had no choice because the bank wanted paying and his income didn't cover the £300,000 Spanish property mortgage.
He bought a small flat in the UK for £300,000, not what he had in mind. The Spanish property fell in value to £150,000 and is not worth much more today. I never saw him at the Golf Club again but I guess he didn't have as much to play with in retirement as he thought.
It's interesting how plans on paper don't always pan out in reality. It's also interesting how many Real Estate Agents have no idea what a real market price is at the moment, because they are effectively part-time door openers.... If they did have a clue then houses would be selling at Auction. This is going to fun to watch.
Pretty hard to get a gauge on "real market" price at the moment, but people will still look at the 30% of houses that have sold at auction, see that those properties sold at around/above 2017 RV and conclude that the market is still going hot.
"Real Market" prices are nigh on impossible to record in a flat to falling market, because the sellers will be holding. 70% of the market at auction is effectively not being measured.
Here we go bloody pommy examples again. Clearly you have no work and sit there and write this crap. You must be 70 plus. What's your motive for a big house price drop, it's not like your age the bank will ever lend you anything. I can give you tons of examples where Aucklanders have made lots of money on their family home or investments. Somehow people like to think and remember negative stories more and live in fear rather than thinking positive. :-)
Why do you get so upset all the time Cheesy? Are you struggling to shift the portfolio... Try again next week at a slightly lower price... Good advice in the story above.. If the chap had listed at the £750,000 in the first place he probably would have got it.. But he went for £1,000,000 ( that some fool had told him) and ended up 18 months later with £600,000.
And for reference I also included a Spanish example in the story as well and in reality the story isn't really for you I was addressing Crispy not you. But once again you turn up uninvited and unwanted.
Family home Rick and there was no gain, he still got 'rubber ducked' by bad investment advice though ... it doesn't always go up you see particularly when the banks have been somewhat over generous in their lending criteria...or lack there of. credit crunch? Highly likely?
That was a boring waste of time...
I met a chap who bought a house in Auckland for $37,000. A real estate agent told him years later it was worth $1m so he went to auction and sold it for $1.3m. Bought a house on the gold coast for $300k, a smaller house in Auckland fro $700k and a Russian Bride with the balance.
Don't be a mug Crispy, buy now and get you a Russian Bride.
Hi Retired-Poppy,
You write above, "......it's easy to visualize a 10% or more pullback in nationwide house prices in next few years."
A few months ago you (and your mates) were telling us that a 30%-50% drop in prices was a best case scenario - and that it could be much worse.
Now you talk of a paltry 10% price drop. (That's hardly a crash after the whopping price increases of 2006-2016.)
We can only conclude that you now believe the housing market outlook has become much more positive.
Good to have your assurance, Retired-Poppy....... And no doubt your mates share your new-found optimism.
TTP
Tothepoint, I found the following stunner of a forecast for NZ house prices posted by you 24 Feb, 2017 @ 10am;
"A fall of a mere 12% over the next 3-4 years would be a soft-landing, given the spectacular gains of the recent past. So, hardly a forecast to get too uptight about. But the fall could be more pronounced than that - shouldn't rule that out. Auckland property prices are in decline now. Unless there's a compelling personal reason, why would one buy a house in Auckland at this juncture? Better to "buy low and sell high" than the other way around - every Joe & Jill Bloggs knows that. And that's exactly the reason buyer confidence is fragile - as indicated by the falling numbers attending open homes (while sellers/investors are striding towards the door in increasing volumes). Buyers have largely got the message that biding one's time is a prudent strategy right now, while over-geared owners/investors are displaying a nervousness not evident a few months back. Buyers - waiting through autumn and winter just might have a silver lining for you......."
https://www.interest.co.nz/property/86171/nz-house-prices-look-set-fall…
Knowing you're the author of this post, feel free to think twice before "copy and paste bagging" similar "DGM" posts - okay?
Anyway, what did you mean when you said "but the fall could be more pronounced than that - shouldn't rule that out" What percentage drop are we talking - 30-50%?
Hi Retired-Property,
If you look at the date of that post (24 Feb 2017) you can work out that it's 16 months ago.
A short while after that, I changed my view and made that VERY CLEAR on this site - as readers know.
Specifically, I stated subsequently that I did not believe there would be any sizeable correction (or crash) in the housing market - because I had reconsidered the market and concluded that the drivers of the upswing (2006-2016) were largely STRUCTURAL, including demographic. That is, it was no ordinary cycle.
That was my new thinking and I have sustained that position to this day.
As it turns out, the last 16 months have proven me to be largely correct. (There was no silver lining "through autumn and winter" of 2017.)
Your opening post above reveals that you have now considerably changed your view. It's perfectly legitimate to change one's view.....
I hope you will be similarly explicit about this.
TTP
Hi Retired-Poppy,
No point trying to pull the wool over our eyes.
Housing price drops have been predicted as being as much as 70% (or more) on several occasions and, in at least one case, 90%.
People here have also talked of the crash "wiping out the price gains of the last decade" and so forth.
It's disingenuous of you to now suggest that price falls of such order of magnitude have never been predicted (and yearned for) on this blog.
Everyone who visits here regularly knows the types of (exaggerated) predictions that get flung around - especially when people are trying to push their own agendas.......
And you're one of the best known culprits.
TTP
TTP
I am less bullish than you.
I think with affordability stretched to the limit, imminent tax changes, and the foreign investment ban (at least on existing houses) we will see Auckland drop at least 5 % over the next months. So I don't pick a big fall as my central position.
However, there is a big caveat to that view in that it assumes there is no significant international / domestic economic shock.
The world economy runs in cycles and we are due another slump of some sort.
I am interested in your view on the likelihood of a slump and how that may or may not shake things up beyond your central view (essentially flat prices next 1-2 years?)
ASB CEO argued in 2013 that low equity loans had a lower rate of default than others so it will be different this time;-); https://www.interest.co.nz/property/65873/asb-ceo-barbara-chapman-defen…
Ha ha, yeah did you see from the Aussie royal commission that the affordability metric the banks used was basically the poverty line ie could you afford to pay debt service even if this meant you ate nothing but time expired baked beans, slept on cardboard and set traps for plump juicy hedgehogs? They generally didn’t assess actual living costs (you know, little things like child support and private schools)....maybe they didn’t like the answer? The Aussie banks lent money on the basis that borrowers would pretty much do all or any of those things in order to make debt service. Well, that’s about to be tested to destruction....
Went to see a house at the weekend.. Bought for $745,000 in 2013. Re-mortgaged in 2016 for wait for it $1,325,000. Been asking $1,400,000 for it since November.. For some reason there are no takers...
No extensions, but lovely kitchens and bathroom and flooring quite exquisite.. Reason for sale. Separation. I asked the agent if he'd had much interest - Apparently they've had lots of offers under a million... Should I tell him that I've done some homework and that he is wasting his time?
Again it would be good to have a link to this house. I would think if it was bought for 745k in 2013 it wouldn't be worth much more than 1.1M unless major changes had been made to it. Some sellers are very silly with their expectations and generally buyers know what an average sort of house is worth.
You just have to keep an eye on sales in your area of similar houses to see what your house is likely to sell for. Knock something like a 100k off and that's what you will most likely sell it for.
This is what I have always done.
You don't even start to question that a bank would lend almost double a purchase price over a 3 year period? Would that not suggest that the banks had no idea / or care for the security of the loan against the actual asset? Merely against the income or serviceability from the borrower? Great if nothing goes wrong.. When things go wrong en masse... different scenario.
It sounds so similar to Northern Rock it's scary... and there are thousands of these loans that have been made Zach, here and in Oz.
In simple terms its like me buying a 1990 Volvo 740 and being able to insure it for $200,000.. If I crash, the insurance company take a huge hit because the car is only really worth a tenner. Which is another reason that we are seeing failures at the mortgagee auctions! There was never enough real value in these places relative to the size of the loans..
The auctions are still required to set a reserve price based on valuations so there is not a fire sale that leaves the mortgagor in an even worse position.
Eventually that reserve will decrease as the market falls and this is recognized in the valuation.
The banks would likely take the best offer (i.e. no reserve) and cut their losses. Those who think the bank is holding out and sets the reserve commensurate with the outstanding loan balance are mistaken.
Valuations are NOT a floor for a mortgagee sale. It is not an impediment to a mortgage sale that such sale may be at a discount to valuation, that is what you would expect on a sale where there are no vendor warranties, often no ability to inspect and often no right to vacant possesssion at completion ie the old somewhat grumpy owner might be in it.
Obviously, if the market value is less than the debt, they’ll take a hit on the debt
Read my post again. I didn't say the "reserve" = the market valuation. I said they are based on i.e. reference is had to them.
The original poster implies all mortgagee auctions start with a $1 no reserve. This is simply wrong and if you believe that you are also wrong. Of course a haircut may result if the market has crashed so that the reserve based on (not set at) a market valuation is below the debt owed and the house sells above reserve but below the debt. However, if you believe you can truck along to a mortgagee auction with a gold coin in your back pocket and pick up a house in Auckland you clearly know nothing about the mortgagee sale process.
Try again sunshine.
Section 176 of the Property Law Act 2007 imposes a duty of care on the mortgagee to get the best attainable price for the mortgagor. In Public Trust v Ottow (2010) 10 NZCPR 879 (HC) (see paragraph [31]) the Court said this required:
(a) The appointment of a reputable real estate agent to market the property.
(b) Obtaining a valuation report from an experienced valuer as a guide to what could reasonably be expected for the property.
(c) Marketing over a reasonably long period of time.
(d) An extensive advertising and promotional campaign.
(e) A properly conducted auction.
(f) A sale price that, given all the circumstances, can be reconciled with expert opinion as to value.
See also https://www.interest.co.nz/sites/default/files/Mortgagee%20sales%20-%20… where the Banking Ombudsman (BO) states:
“The bank relied on an inaccurate valuation and sold the house for less than it was worth.”
[BO Answer] As long as the valuation was provided by a registered valuer, we’d be likely to conclude it was reasonable for the banking service provider to rely on that valuation when accepting an offer to buy the property. However, if the banking service provider was aware of a significant factor that meant the valuation could not be relied on, we would take this into account. If you have a complaint about the registered valuer, you can complain to the Valuers Registration Board.
..............
A valuation is required and is taken into account when setting a reserve for a mortgagee auction. I hope you are not giving legal advice to anyone because you are out of your depth.
You interpret "bla bla" as a legal requirement to get a registered valuation and take it into consideration when setting a reserve price for a mortgagee auction. You must be the world expert in the language of "bla bla bla".
You should right novels... "bla bla bla..."
Or become a songwriter... 'bla bla bla blaaaa blaaaa"
Or, better yet, all future comments from you on this site should just be "bla bla bla", that would make more sense than your normal drivel.
Yeah, you are making my point for me. A lenders owes a duty of care but that is a duty of process, not an obligation not to sell for less than a specified amount. If the process the mortgage follows is a reasonable one then the fact the sale price achieved at auction may be at a discount to what is “market value” for a sale that is not a mortgagee sale is just the borrowers tough cheese. If the lender acts reasonably and with skill and care, the borrower and any secured lender with lower priority is stuck with that result. Mortgage sales have a far weaker set of vendor covenanats than ordinary sales, a mortgage sale could quite easily result in a material discount to an ordinary sale, but there is no problem with that. It’s the borrowers tough luck. Nice try....
“The bank does not have to wait for the best time to sell the property or improve the property before mortgagee sale. A mortgagee sale for a price less than the current market value usually does not in itself establish a breach of the bank’s obligation ..... If the real estate agent followed a reasonable marketing plan, the property was appropriately advertised and was reasonably available to potential purchasers to view, we are likely to find that the sales process was fair.”
Yeah, but the valuation does not set a floor on the mortgage sale price. Provided the process the lender followed was reasonable, it is entirely open to a mortgage to sell a property at below market value if that is the best that can be achieved after completion of a reasonable sales process. So I suspect those auctions were pulled because the bids didn’t cover the debt, not because the bids were too far below “market value”
Yes it does. Okay, let's try this example.
Jim the mortgagor borrows $100k. Jim stops paying mortgage and bank starts mortgagee sale process as Jim refuses to deal with the bank as they are "all crooks". The bank instructs B&T (arguably a reputable RE agent) who advertise the sale for a couple of months and gets 2 registered valuations of the property at $1.2m and $1.25m.
Auction day arrives and B&T and Bobster is the bank's rep at the auction. B&T ask Bobster what is the reserve price he says $100k plus whatever you guys are charging. The property sells after several bids for $150k to the jubilant purchaser. Bobster takes $100k back to his boss, B&T keep $30k and he sends a cheque for $20k to Jim.
If you think this is the end of the story Bobster you are sadly mistaken. Do you want me to tell you how it ends?....
The valuation is NOT a floor below which a mortgagee may not sell. A property is sold at a mortgage sale with no vendor warranties “as is”, without vacant possession. You should know what the market value is (hence the valuation) but if after a reasonable sales process you cannot achieve the valuation you are not bound by it. See the attached, requoted:
“A mortgagee sale for a price less than the current market value usually does not in itself establish a breach of the bank’s obligation ..... If the real estate agent followed a reasonable marketing plan, the property was appropriately advertised and was reasonably available to potential purchasers to view, we are likely to find that the sales process was fair.”
https://bankomb.org.nz/guides-and-cases/quick-guides/lending/mortgagee-…
Seems pretty definitive....
What if it grinds to a halt at $275K and the bank wants to cut its losses and sell anyway?
You indicate 30% (your educated guess) would be a reasonable discount from registered valuation in a falling market. Would this be your reserve or do you think that the bank is able to sell at $275k (i.e. a 75% discount on the registered valuation)?...
Do you accept that a reserve price must be set? I never said a reserve is set at market/registered value, rather it is used as a reference for setting a reserve.
I've given up on Bobster but let's see if you have half a brain.
No, you need to reread my answer, I would set the reserve at bottom range of market value but if I got bids within 30% I would waive that reserve and sell. A bid of $275k would indicate there was a problem with process, or at least raise a question as to whether I could defend that process. As I said, your examples seem a bit silly.
The “falling market” reference is irrelevant, even in a stable market if I was comfortable with the integrity of the process if the best bid I got as mortgagee vendor was market -30% that seems to me a not unreasonable result for a mortgagee sale and I would let it go
You're not "Pragmatist" too are you?...
God help us if you are running 2 accounts. Double trouble.
Anyway, you have answered the question (as or for "Pragmatist") which is you would use the market valuation to set an appropriate reserve (somewhere between a 75% to 30% discount apparently).
That wasn't too hard was it?....
No, your point was that you could not sell below the valuation. Which was 100% wrong. It’s a question of a fair and reasonable process. Good grief....
You said “The auctions are still required to set a reserve price based on valuations so there is not a fire sale that leaves the mortgagor in an even worse position“. You can split hairs about what you meant by “fire sale”, but it is pretty clear a mortgage sale can (and often does) result in the sale of a mortgaged property at a material and possibly significant discount to the market value that might be achieved by sale by another method that is not a forced sale. And provided the sales process is reasonable it is totally ok for a lender to sell at level of discount.
"Based on" does not mean "set at". You have straw manned my comment. "Fire sale" is neither here nor there and is just another example of you missing the point.
Of course property can sell below a market value at a mortgagee auction but there will be a limit to the discount that will be allowed.
The original poster asked how does a property not sell at mortgagee sale. All the Chicken Lickens pipped up with their conspiracy theory that the banks had over lent and didn't want to take a hair cut. Instead they would make the decision to hold the property in the vain hope they would somehow make their money back when property prices double next year. In the mean time they are happy for the mortgagee and their family to continue living in the house rent free until the big bounce arrives rather then taking the best offer and re-lending the cash. Your tale is the wacky one.
The better answer to why they didn't sell is that a reserve price is still required to be met, not a reserve "set at" a market valuation but a reserve which takes into account (includes as its basis e.g. based on) the market valuation. This will obviously be a discount to the market valuation in light of the mortgagee sale but there is no "no reserve fire sale" as implied by the original post.
You guys are so lost in your conspiracy theory you cannot accept a reasonable alternative to your world view.
Your example is silly. The reserve would be (say) the market value as per the valuation. Bids come in to market value less 25%. The bank has run a reasonable sales process and would be entitled to waive the reserve and let it go for that. Again, no vendor warranties, no chattels, no vacant possession (indeed, grumpy owner is still in it and refuses to leave). The result is not unreasonable. If the bank only gets a bid for 10% of market value then that may be evidence that the sales prices was not a reasonable one, your example is a bit silly.
So you accept a reserve price of at least 10% of market value would be required?....
You may not want to answer this Bobster as if you say "yes" you admit a market value is relevant in setting a reserve price for a mortgagee auction so all your previous babble is exactly that....
I recommend you go with the "silly question" defense again.
Err...no, if you only got a bid of 10% of the market value that would indicate to me that the sales process you followed was not a reasonable one. And again, your example is silly because it is highly unlikely that you would be limited to a bid of 10% in a competitive bid situation. If in fact that was all that you could achieve in a competive auction following a reasonable sales process then you could have to question that valuation and you may well take 10%.
No more silly examples please...
The likelihood will be that any bids were below the level of the mortgage debt. The banks will be getting very concerned now because each time they lower the bar the market gets to see how bad it really is.
What happened in the UK was that the banks had to bury their heads in sand, extend peoples loan terms even further and switch debtors onto interest only.... Some just let the debts build up on the balance sheet rather than recognise the reality of the losses.
Its amazing how quickly the market is falling apart now and we haven't even had a proper shock yet.
I'd read a bit more broadly and take independent financial advice before making any big investment decisions like selling up to buy gold. If you calm down and take a step back, you'll find that this comment section really is an insular microcosm talking itself into a frenzy.
Also, I hear a well-made tinfoil hat is a top notch way to conceal a bald head.
I keep coming back for the articles. The comments are generally face-palm material though.
You created your username 'Houses Overpriced' 7 years and 2 weeks ago. Suggests you've been advising people to stay out of the housing market and talking up the impending collapse since then. Still waiting ay.
Haha. If that is the best comeback you can muster, I'm guessing that 7 long years of 'wrong and waiting' has turned your mind to mush :)
I can assure you I'm not grumpy. About 7 years ago when you had the bright idea of declaring 'Houses Overpriced', I was settling on a rental in the North Shore. More than doubled in value today. I'm actually pretty happy.
No, but I'm still interested. But in the same way that I would find a train wreck or car crash interesting.
Lets have a crack at summing up your life thus far shall we. 29 years old, male, flatting, no girlfriend, net worth sub 50K (kiwisaver, maybe term deposit), bitter, perhaps a qualification (but not a useful one), introverted, risk-averse, easily flustered.
I know a lot of people from lower-middle class backgrounds about that age with networth around (or less than) 50k. Shit I know a lot of people that age and older with a negative net-worth.
I also don't think someone as confident and secure in themselves as you try and portray would spend all this time trying to dig into a posters personal details and - when they didn't get them - invent their own personal details. I mean the girlfriend thing was really reaching - you're seriously sheltered if you don't think poor people get laid lol. But I'm just not really buying the image you're projecting. Maybe you managed to have a large amount of cash in your early 20s - well done (or maybe - well done to your mum and dad) but if you weren't having second thoughts about it - why so spiteful?
Being triggered by the name 'Houses Overpriced' - when by all global standards they are - doesn't really suggest to me someone brimming with confidence. You've had a good start in life (if you're telling the truth) - learn to be content.
its alright mate, I didn't take it personal, as only I know my personal circumstances and I don't have to go down to his level to prove anything...
It was proved long ago that he is fake.. and the last thing we should ever do is feel awkward about fake people asking for your details .. cause they want to pretend to feel better than you..
No doubt in my mind that the wisest and most good natured people on this planet are among the poorest. That has been my experience. Didn’t intend to come off as elitist. I’m simply giving Houses Overpriced grief as he is asking for it and I obliged. I gave as good as I got, so my conscience is clear.
Dear Houses Overpriced (HO),
You write "you should be the last one to comment, Mr pointless".
TTP is not pointless. Pointless means "not having a point, or being without a point" You will note that TTP made an incredibly funny joke about your Morris Minor driving. That was hilarious and I believe a point very well made indeed!! Well done TTP, well done !
MTP
Dear Houses Overpriced.
You write " You definitely sound like ttps partner. .Partners in crime. .."
In fact I am not. I have never met TTP. I just have a healthy respect for him and I believe all DGMs on this site would do well by honouring and respecting his intellect. If you actually read what he writes, he is very well rounded, polite and above all intelligent. Well done TTP, well done.
MTP
Retired-Poopy, nice to hear from you as always. As previously discussed, I'm predicting 1% YOY rise from this month, so going to stay put. As for you, you should be putting those retirement savings into a low maintenance flat in Dunedin. That nugget of advice is free for you.
Hmmm, hanging out for 1% YOY after bagging 100% reads more like a Wannabe desperate to be taken seriously. Anyway, if there's some truth to it, I hope you make a better Landlord than a storyteller. Reading into your comments, I suspect you bought in the last 24 months and like DGZ you check the spot price of your rental daily and pin it to your fridge.
"1% YOY, but over the next 20 years, houses perform slightly ahead of inflation" So are you forecasting zero inflation for the next 20-years. Thats a bold call. How do you work this stuff out? Extraordinary. I trust that your Landlording is better than your forecasting. No offence but this is not the time to be heavily leveraged.
You created your username 'Houses Overpriced' 7 years and 2 weeks ago. Suggests you've been advising people to stay out of the housing market and talking up the impending collapse since then.
Doesn't suggest that to me.
Housing has been overpriced for a long time in NZ. And during a lot of that time it was still arguably a good investment. Not sure if that's the case today.
Regardless for us FHB millenial peons with poor parents, the investment potential of low-quality weatherboard shitboxes (aka most houses in NZ) is almost irrelevant.
But I didn't say anything about houses being over-priced or not. All I said was that he has likely been advising people to stay out of the housing market and talking up the impending collapse for the last 7 years.
Also, weatherboards are the best cladding for NZ weather conditions!!!
Weatherboards are the second most expensive cladding system (of the types commonly used). Second only to brick.
Tell your "mild rain" story to the poor buggers in monolithic houses, lying awake at night, staring at the ceiling, wondering when those little droplets are going to find a way in. Mother nature has nothing on her hands but time - she will find a way in eventually. When she does, a cavity system is your only hope.
Agree 100%. I own a weatherboard house and when I recently renovated and stripped back the internal rooms to the bare wooden frames, their was zero mould, zero rot. The treated timber still looked new! Weatherboard houses also survive major earthquakes better than over and above other houses, because they will twist and turn during an earthquake and ince the shaking stops they pretty much return back to their original position. These houses are designed to move with momentum. Brick houses are designed to walk away and never go back.
Vested interest to the right, vested interest to the left.
Options are a asset reset (including housing) or a wage in price spiral which will bail our the debt stacking ponzi and destroy the value of any savings (aka retired people). Hard to imagine Winston letting the second happen but you never know.
TTP
I think you have highlighted the similarities of Bitcoin and Auckland housing very well.. Both subject to Chinese speculation, booms followed by major corrections in value. Well done TTP.
Buy now? Probably best not as likely to get a lot cheaper.. Thanks for the advice
A quick look at Auckland Trade Me listings show quite a sharp decline – I simply can’t imagine that’s due to sale numbers flying out the door.
Is it fair to assume this market is now creating seller reluctance to throw their property to the wolves – enter the traditional winter of discontent?
But a glorious spring – maybe – or the eventual unleashing of a wave of supply?
Good post custard reckon we have just met the first phase of a crash..... Sellers start living by a River in Egypt.. DENIAL.
The real Estate Industry here have no idea how to do anything other than talk it up or blame the weather (and most don't read beyond the Dom post or Herald so have no clue on anything beyond their suburb..., so it's highly likely that the next wave of houses that come to market in Spring will be theirs! Advice to sellers.. If your real estate agent start selling, undercut them and get out of the River in Egypt... Phase 2 is acceptance...My guess would be Christmas time.
Third phase - Capitulation.
Fourth - Panic
That will be 2019...and it all turns to custard then... No real value, just hope there is a buyer who will give you anything...
Nic Johnson, you have made up another fictitious house and amount borrowed against it story again.
I would’ve thought that you would have learnt after that BS a week or two ago?
Why on earth you need to make up these stories defies logic!
What is the address of this so called property and seem you reckon you know how much has been lent against it, you will be able to advise us all, who the lending institution was!
If the lender has lent over 1.3 million on it would’ve valued the property at in excess of $1.7 million.
Stop making up BS Nic.
Westpac.
BNZ leant $1,125,000 in 2016 on a house that was purchased that same year for $795,000. Just around the corner from the other one.
Give me an address and 3 days and I'll let you know the mortgage amount of the most recent loan secured against that property, the date it was taken out and the lender. You really have no clue at all do you TM2?
You're selecting extreme examples Nic. These mortgages probably have multiple properties securing them. Banks will sell all your houses to get their money back, not just the one. To you it looks like one mortgage, one house, but that's not the case. Sigh, fake news.
Nic, what was the address of this property and the one last week?
As far as I am aware nowadays the amount borrowed is not on public record anymore.
If you are obtaining these figures, then someone is severely breaching the Privacy Act!
I can guarantee that no Bank nowadays is going to lend $1,125,000 on a house purchased the same year for 795k .
With the lending requirements nowadays it is impossible unless there were already other mortgages on other properties already held.
We can borrow any amount really by leveraging against our other property equity.
As for having no clue Nic, what I don’t do is BS!!
Mortgages will be on public record - the LINZ website has a process for ordering a property title - which includes a mortgage if there is one one the property (it does not say what level of detail is provided)
https://www.linz.govt.nz/land/land-records/types-land-records/property-…
TM2 - Badrobot has provided the source below... There are thousands of these loans fortunately most of the country have been sensible with their borrowings but there is probably 10% who should have been locked into the TAB rather than being given access to leverage.
I have never told BS on this site. And I have never accused you of it either, partly because I think you'd probably struggle to be that clever.
And then I rethink “black swans”.
One of the key drivers in the US housing collapse was the failure of the banks – and the disintegration of credit.
Looking at China’s markets today – and the rhetoric flying around – is Australia somewhat at the mercy of all this carry-on.
A debt mountain, ultra-loose lending books, management asleep at the wheel, or simply not caring or too incentivized to not care – what begets the Big 4 if the worst case comes to pass.
However – no one wants that on their watch – another bail-out?
"...to convince as many to buy up before the ban"
Have you not read this HO my friend?
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/property/news/article.cfm?c_id=8&objectid=12…
Under the new regime, overseas investors would be able to invest in new housing, particularly apartments, new rentals and homes in rent-to-own or shared-equity arrangements, Parker said.
Lefever said some of the amended provisions included developers being allowed to retain interests in new projects if it was 20-plus residences.
Developers of 20+ apartments per building could apply for an exemption certificate, allowing them to sell a certain percentage of the apartments to overseas buyers without those buyers requiring OIO consent, she noted.
dgz,, my friend, why are you proving to be less intelligent as the days go by???
if you read the above article, its very obvious that foreign buyers are not going to have the same luxury as they have today. please dont try to pull wool over peoples eyes, ah but that is exactly what RE agents do
My dear friend HO, that's why I only mentioned apartments. Be not afraid my dear HO, I am not some kind of RE agents and I am not in China to convince my fellow Chinese to buy before the ban. I am merely home for an extended holiday 妳现在高兴了吗？
My fav Chinese songs to share with you my dear HO enjoy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwxE6G_ZbeQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWchGLnPrKM
http://money.cnn.com/2018/06/18/investing/stock-markets-trade-war-china…
i can only imagine that people will move to safer havens, nz property is def, the last thing they will bet on..
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.